Saturday, May 19, 2012

"...If you're afraid of black nationalism, you're afraid of revolution. And if you
love revolution, you love black nationalism.

To understand this, you have to go back to what [the] young brother here
referred to as the house Negro and the field Negro -- back during slavery. There
was two kinds of slaves. There was the house Negro and the field Negro. The
house Negroes - they lived in the house with master, they dressed pretty good,
they ate good 'cause they ate his food -- what he left. They lived in the attic
or the basement, but still they lived near the master; and they loved their
master more than the master loved himself. They would give their life to save
the master's house quicker than the master would. The house Negro, if the master
said, "We got a good house here," the house Negro would say, "Yeah, we got a
good house here." Whenever the master said "we," he said "we." That's how you
can tell a house Negro.If the master's house caught on fire, the house Negro would fight harder to
put the blaze out than the master would. If the master got sick, the house Negro
would say, "What's the matter, boss, we sick?" We sick! He identified himself
with his master more than his master identified with himself. And if you came to
the house Negro and said, "Let's run away, let's escape, let's separate," the
house Negro would look at you and say, "Man, you crazy. What you mean, separate?
Where is there a better house than this? Where can I wear better clothes than
this? Where can I eat better food than this?" That was that house Negro. In
those days he was called a "house nigger." And that's what we call him today,
because we've still got some house niggers running around here.This modern house Negro loves his master. He wants to live near him. He'll
pay three times as much as the house is worth just to live near his master, and
then brag about "I'm the only Negro out here." "I'm the only one on my job."
"I'm the only one in this school." You're nothing but a house Negro. And if
someone comes to you right now and says, "Let's separate," you say the same
thing that the house Negro said on the plantation. "What you mean, separate?
From America? This good white man? Where you going to get a better job than you
get here?" I mean, this is what you say. "I ain't left nothing in Africa,"
that's what you say. Why, you left your mind in Africa.On that same plantation, there was the field Negro. The field Negro -- those
were the masses. There were always more Negroes in the field than there was
Negroes in the house. The Negro in the field caught hell. He ate leftovers. In
the house they ate high up on the hog. The Negro in the field didn't get nothing
but what was left of the insides of the hog. They call 'em "chitt'lings"
nowadays. In those days they called them what they were: guts. That's what you
were -- a gut-eater. And some of you all still gut-eaters. *The field Negro was beaten from morning to night. He lived in a shack, in a
hut; He wore old, castoff clothes. He hated his master. I say he hated his
master. He was intelligent. That house Negro loved his master. But that field
Negro -- remember, they were in the majority, and they hated the master. When
the house caught on fire, he didn't try and put it out; that field Negro prayed
for a wind, for a breeze. When the master got sick, the field Negro prayed that
he'd die. If someone come [sic] to the field Negro and said, "Let's separate,
let's run," he didn't say "Where we going?" He'd say, "Any place is better than
here." You've got field Negroes in America today. I'm a field Negro. The masses
are the field Negroes. When they see this man's house on fire, you don't hear
these little Negroes talking about "our government is in trouble." They say,
"The government is in trouble." Imagine a Negro: "Our government"! I even heard
one say "our astronauts." They won't even let him near the plant -- and "our
astronauts"! "Our Navy" -- that's a Negro that's out of his mind. That's a Negro
that's out of his mind.Just as the slavemaster of that day used Tom, the house Negro, to keep the
field Negroes in check, the same old slavemaster today has Negroes who are
nothing but modern Uncle Toms, 20th century Uncle Toms, to keep you and me in
check, keep us under control, keep us passive and peaceful and nonviolent.
That's Tom making you nonviolent. It's like when you go to the dentist, and the
man's going to take your tooth. You're going to fight him when he starts
pulling. So he squirts some stuff in your jaw called novocaine, to make you
think they're not doing anything to you. So you sit there and 'cause you've got
all of that novocaine in your jaw, you suffer peacefully. Blood running all down
your jaw, and you don't know what's happening. 'Cause someone has taught you to
suffer -- peacefully." [Listen]

"We sick"? Yes, "we sick". Because, sadly, there are still a lot of house Negroes running around today.

RE Desmond Hatchett - Clearly, the solution is to hold men legally accountable for supporting their children, and to take the burden off of the mothers.

Oh, wait, we already do that...

Let's think about the simple math involved. One father and 11 mothers created 30 children. That's twelve parents, but because the kids are all bastards it's 12 households. In a traditional Western-style situation, given 12 parents it would conceivably be six households, which is feasible (although stretching it these days).

However, thanks to the glorification of the single mother lifestyle, there are many more, with much more associated expense. We tend to think of Desmond as the beneficiary of this, but come on... The guy is still giving up 50% of his income before taxes, and that sucks.

Sure, he's an irresponsible idiot, but he isn't paying any more than a man who married, had four kids, and then lost his family to frivolous divorce (CS benefits are capped at four kids).

So what are we going to do about it? Are we going to jack up CS even more for any sucker who loses his wife for whatever reason, e.g. she wasn't happy (70% of divorces), or are we going to shift some of the burden onto single mothers?

There's only so much blood you can squeeze from a stone like Desmond Hatchett, but there's probably a lot more to be squeezed from the 11 babymommas. In fact, if they knew they'd have to pay for it, they wouldn't have had the kids with him in the first place. If women knew from the beginning that they'd get nothing - not even tax credits - if they had a kid with a bum, then Mr. Hatchett would probably have no more than five or six kids by now, I'd bet.

So why do we continue to reward single motherhood? Why are they eligible for so many goodies? There will always be a Desmond Hatchett out there; a fool who doesn't think further than the next orgasm. This story only confirms that controlling men's fertility has limited utility in preventing illegitimacy. One hundred men could be perfect gentlemen, and all it takes is one dumb cad to inseminate dozens of babymommas. So why is it that the average male has to be lumped in with such idiots?

I pay hundreds of times the child support Hatchett does per child, and I drive hundreds of miles per month to do my duty as a father, which is purely a voluntary exercise. I did the responsible thing, got married, and had only a couple kids. But it doesn't matter, because all we hear about are these stories, and that's what shapes the laws. This special kind of idiocy that absolves women of any and all responsibility for reproduction is designed to produce exactly the outcome you highlight here.

Until the name of each woman who had kids with Hatchett is in the paper, and each one held equally responsible for this crap, there will be no change. But instead we only focus on one parent out of twelve.

You make some good points about holding women responsible, destructive feminist principles, men's rights and responsibilities, etc. But don't you get that all this discussion is completely irrelevant in this particular case and other similar cases?

Desmond isn't like you. His baby mamas aren't like the women you know. They have no higher philosophical/political principles. They don't think about the future. At all. They have sex because they are horny and the other person happens to be there, and then babies come as a surprise each time. Desmond didn't want any more children after getting into trouble for the 21 he already had. Now, there are 9 more because remembering that he has to do something and planning one little step ahead really is very difficult for such people. For you, it happens involuntarily. For him, it's almost impossible. Do you realize how many separate logical thoughts a woman must accomplish to make a decision to avoid sleeping with this guy when something tickles between her legs? 1. Sex leads to babies. 2. This man already has very many babies. 3. This man doesn't take care of his many babies. 4. It's kind of hard to take care of yet another baby, and it won't be very fun alone. Ect, ect. The women, you guys, know have probably finished high school, can hold down some sort of a job and are able to carry a conversation of some sort. The women in your circle could have all these thoughts register at the same time. Desmond's baby mamas can't. They aren't capable. I deal with these types of people everyday. They don't see this type of an outcome as a mistake. It's just something that happens to them, completely out of their control.

You think they would respond to withdrawal of the incentives? There's 9 months between the sex and the baby. These people need immediate reinforcement, positive or negative, not something that will or will not happen in 9 months. Their brains will not make the connection between something feeling good tonight and the discomfort/hunger/plight 9 months later. They'll do it again. If you have any further questions, why don't you visit your nearest ghetto high school and talk to the pregnant girls with a kid at home already. Most of them are single, unhappy, struggling and really, really hoping for a man to love them and stay with them. Most of them were not in a relationship when they got pregnant. By the end of your conversation, you'll come away with an absolute certainty that they will do the same thing again.

" Most of them are single, unhappy, struggling and really, really hoping for a man to love them and stay with them."

Yes,"A single mother, that's a sacred thing, man."

Not buying it. They are having kids and we're footing the bill, they aren't so dumb as to rub it in the face of their benefactors - they put on a pity act for the white folks. I knew a half retarded black security guard who had a kid by every black guy who ever pushed a handtruck into an elevator. So sad. Not too dumb to have a half dozen sexual harassment suits against her bosses. So clever.

"Hey negro, I own you. I am your master. I demand your absolute loyalty and obedience, and in return, I'll throw you some scraps. You will always do whatever I tell you to do, and you will never question me.

"Not buying it. They are having kids and we're footing the bill, they aren't so dumb as to rub it in the face of their benefactors - they put on a pity act for the white folks. I knew a half retarded black security guard who had a kid by every black guy who ever pushed a handtruck into an elevator. So sad. Not too dumb to have a half dozen sexual harassment suits against her bosses. So clever."

Obviously, there are different types of people out there. But you're wrong about a few things. Firstly, they rub our noses into it just fine. I attended federal unemployment extension "class" several times, with different mothers. There, people openly say that they could be working, or working full time, but they don't want to. At school, mothers who bring their whole broods for the free breakfast openly talk about having enough food stamps to feed an army, but trading them for fake purses and to get their hair done. I know these girls aren't putting on a show. No one here has any shame. They consider the government money a given, not something they need to talk someone into.

Also, it's strange that you don't believe that a 16 year old girl wishes she had a man who loved her. Next, you'll tell me that 16 year old boys don't really want to have sex. Yes, most of my elementary girls say that they want a really good husband and don't plan on being alone with a bunch of kids. They are just too dumb to avoid that situation, and they don't understand that having sex with a random guy who isn't even their boyfriend and having babies by him while in middle school will greatly diminish their chances to find that husband that almost all of them want. Young teenagers (they start YOUNG around here, I know several in their preteens) don't have babies to avoid work and get on welfare. They are legally children, aren't expected to work and are already on welfare. They ARE sad. Boys taunt them. In one of my summer school high school classes, I lost control when all the boys started telling a new mother that she's fat, dark, will never get a man to look at her twice and her baby is as ugly as she is. This kind of a thing happens a lot.

I'm not trying to make you feel sorry for these women (and men who get 50% of their paychecks garnished from their early 20s on). I'm merely illustrating that a lot of this happens due to complete lack of agency/ability to plan half a step ahead/ self-control, not due to manipulative behavior. A lot of the ghetto dwellers are... different than you.

Listen to Maya here. We are all too aware of the existence of the testosterone-loaded borderline retarded; and yet, when faced with an example, we fall into a kind of empathy-projection fallacy, imputing our own hifalutin concepts of agency onto that 75 IQ specimen.

They have sex because they are horny and the other person happens to be there, and then babies come as a surprise each time.

I'm not so sure how much of a "surprise" these pregnancies are. I spent much of my teen years living in a black neighborhood, and had a number of black friends, Unlike teenage white boys, who typically have zero interest in becoming dads, many young black guys I knew seemed VERY eager to become "fathers"--especially if the opportunity was with a pretty girl. Having kids by a bunch of different women is considered the height of "manliness" amongst many black males. This is made easy by the fact they will not have to actually raise their children or likely even pay anything.

I don't agree with that chitlin passage of his, once you get past the smell those things rock, and I think Bob Marley got revolution better when he said that it was liberating ourselves from mental slavery, but you've gotta appreciate his clarity in a time of cataclysmic change.

That is why this is so gloriously awesome Maya, the system HAS to deal with these people, whether it wants to or not. And it has to apply the rules equally to decidedly unequal people. Therefore, the solution to this has to be a solution to all. So either feminism takes one, or the democrat special interest ball takes one.

Having said I agree with Maya, that these kinds of people don't think before acting, that there's no impulse control, I have to add that almost 50 years of social policies that send them checks for that baby have to be considered in the mix.

These people existed 50 years ago, face it. Low IQ people have always been with us, people who don't think about consequences, people who have little to no impulse control. Maybe there are more of them today because they've bred so much, but consider that before our welfare society extended to include all kinds of goodies and before it was considered a source of social shame to be living off the dole, this kind of behavior was not as rampant as it is today.

Thus, I have to agree with many other posters who state that our largess is one reason the problem has grown.

Desmond isn't like you. His baby mamas aren't like the women you know. They have no higher philosophical/political principles. They don't think about the future. At all. They have sex because they are horny and the other person happens to be there, and then babies come as a surprise each time

-Maya

That's total BS. Only the most retarded of all do not understand that sex=babies. And these women were free to abort, and are surrounded by subsidized Planned Parenthood birth control resources. They freely chose to have those kids, probably because there was something about Mr. Hatchett they admired.

Even baboons understand the consequences of having sex with the wrong male. Yes, baboons. Are you going to tell me, Maya, that these people are dumber than baboons?

They did the deed and had the babies because they knew that the state would back them up. I, too, am familiar with the kind of people you mention. They are not as dumb as you portray them.

As hard as it may be for a lot of readers to understand, there was something about Mr. Hatchett that they liked, and that convinced them he was good babydaddy material. At least 50% of that was probably the understanding that despite his negative characteristics, the state would pick up the slack for his failings.

When the state takes on the role of provider, women choose other qualities in a man. It may seem to be a revolutionary concept to some, but in certain communities the guys who are not providers, and who give nothing to the state, are more attractive. The man who can get away with giving nothing to the state is the real alpha, because his resources go entirely into reproduction, whereas the rest of us fools work and work to pay for babymommas who have other men's children.

The solution is to stop making men pay for women who are not their wives.

"Having said I agree with Maya, that these kinds of people don't think before acting, that there's no impulse control, I have to add that almost 50 years of social policies that send them checks for that baby have to be considered in the mix."

Yes, of course. From reading regional authors and listening to stories from the older teachers of humble origins, I think dumbass behavior was always present. And, no, I don't think they are more stupid than baboons. They do know where babies come from. It's just that they have trouble visualizing what it's going to be like or caring about something that might happen in 9 months. So back to the olden times of 50 year ago... Here is how I understand it: since the government didn't take care of these people, their quality of life was much worse and they relied on the smartest person in their clan to keep them fed, clothed and out of the rain. In turn, this one smart grandfather, mother or uncle realized that he or she is responsible for everyone, so this person beat the crap out of any kid who was observed doing anything which might create another mouth to feed or diminish the possibility of getting rid of her by marrying her off. Getting whipped into oblivion for being seen going off with a boy just a few hours after it happens is a lot more immediate than a baby in 9 months, and thus it's a much better reinforcement for those not oriented towards the future.

As far as the underclass babies of 50 years ago being mostly born within the bounds of marriage, that is true, but you'd be wrong to imagine that the majority of these marriages created functioning families. People were expected to get married, so they did. But husbands, among this population,abandoned their wives. A lot. Divorce was a lot more common than you think. Some didn't even bother with divorce and just got married again in a different state. Kids were commonly shipped back and forth between those somewhat responsible relatives who tried to keep them on the straight and narrow by beating them into submission (often with desired outcomes). If you don't have nice, elderly Southern teachers or church ladies from the poor areas to tell you these things, try reading Maya Angelou's autobiography, James Baldwin's depiction of the church going colored folk or anything about Oprah's life. If you want more, I'll send you some regional autobiographies and memoirs. It's all filled with god fearing, church going people who honestly try to do the right thing, but end up married several times and have their kids raised by someone older and smarter who used to beat them.

Getting whipped into oblivion for being seen going off with a boy just a few hours after it happens is a lot more immediate than a baby in 9 months, and thus it's a much better reinforcement for those not oriented towards the future.

-Maya

Ah, Maya, your heart is bleeding. Do you think daddies had to whip their daughters "into oblivion" to convince them to behave? Were you that difficult to control?

It doesn't even approach that. Unfortunately, fathers these days have no agency whatsoever in these communities. Actually, once you get down to the third quintile (i.e. middle middle class), fathers have no leverage, so it isn't only the poor who are lacking.

In the old days, a daddy could say "if you run off with that boy, you aren't getting anything from me." Today, only a father in the top 25% has that leverage. Whippings had nothing to do with it. Also, as in my case, a lot of us have no leverage either way. If my ex wants me to pay for my daughter to go to college to study queer studies, a judge will probably order me to pay for it -- until my daughter is 25! I have no agency whatsoever for the next 20 years. What Working-class woman wouldn't pass that up? Getting a divorce gives a woman a lot more control over the father than staying married to him would.

The real problem is that the state substitutes for both daddy and husband, as Obama's "Life of Julia" so explicitly demonstrates. So why should women prefer Honest Joe 9-to-5 to Desmond Hatchett?

If the woman isn't going to find a high-earning male to exploit (easier said than done), she might as well find one who's attractive. This is why all the outrage over Desmond Hatchett is misplaced. So what if he's the father of all those kids? It wouldn't matter if they had eleven fathers, since the women aren't going to get jack for child support anyway, and they'll get the same TANF. So why not have the babies with a smooth, attractive guy who makes them happy?

The dumbness really is displayed by men who think that punishing men for the choices women make will make a difference. I understand why you, Maya, would defend the girls, because why would the ladies want to give up this kind of candyland they've got going? I mean, if you had hookers paying men to sleep with them, you'd probably have a very vociferous men's lobby for keeping the status quo. But the problem is that we can't afford it, and it's wrecking society. Sometimes, you've got to make some sacrifices for the greater good, and make do without scratching that itch, or "tickle" as you put it.

Anon@11:39p--"Fuck you Whitey. This a Black blog, and we are tired of you sucking our dicks. Beat it."

"This is a Black blog?..."WE" are tired?" I am "tired" of Negroes like you speaking for me. I happen to like Chitterlings, once I've gotten past the smell.

I swear. There's always some racist-ass Negro playing 'dictator' about 'how' ALL Negroes should be thinking, and 'how' FN should be. Which is, of course, according to the way YOU want Field to run his blog.

FYI: Field has never declared that FN is solely for Blacks, and therefore non-Blacks are not welcome. YOU implied that, not Field.

Believe it or not, there are some Negroes who look forward to 'diversity of opinions' instead of your one-dimensional racism. That doesn't help anyone, it only perpetuates racism.

Field, ""We sick"? Yes, "we sick". Because, sadly, there are still a lot of house Negroes running around today."

There is another growing class of Negroes today: 'depressed Negroes'.

Unfortunately, many other Negroes like Field are in denial about depression and PTSD in the black community. It's as if Field thinks Blacks are unaffected by racism, joblessness, fatherless children, and abandonment by the government.

Depression is ignored and it leads to more violence and more drastic measures for help.

I love the title of this post. Just who are these HNs? I really don't know of any unless it's the black Dems. Black Republicans know nothing about being a House Negro. They are too busy building a better America for Blacks. They are the true brave black Davy Crocketts that are blazing a trail for other black Republicans.

That's more than I can say about weak spineless not-going-anywhere black Dems. A classic example is the CBC. They are useless and worthless when it comes to serving the voters who voted for them. If there are HNs, it's the likes of them and others who support them.

"Anonymous said...Anon@11:39p--"Fuck you Whitey. This a Black blog, and we are tired of you sucking our dicks. Beat it."

"This is a Black blog?..."WE" are tired?" I am "tired" of Negroes like you speaking for me. I happen to like Chitterlings, once I've gotten past the smell. "

Anonymous 11:39 and 1:40 you are one and the same person. I don;t know what kind of game you think you are playing, but you are convincing nobody.

**

Funny isn't it? Poor, single Mom's are told they have to go out to work, otherwise they are 'leaching on society'. Yet rich women (aka Mrs. Romney) who have raised kids with the help of a nanny, an au pair and a other domestic help, are doing "the hardest job in the world".

"Funny isn't it? Poor, single Mom's are told they have to go out to work, otherwise they are 'leaching on society'. Yet rich women (aka Mrs. Romney) who have raised kids with the help of a nanny, an au pair and a other domestic help, are doing "the hardest job in the world"."

I definitely get your point PC, single working Mom's especially those who lack college degrees, work harder than ANY mothers I've ever seen. And (racists white) people forget that women become single parens two oher ways, through divorce and the death of a spouse.

One day I will write a serious book on children born to sperm donors and the entire child support debate.

As if the entire population of children born from donated sperm have created a need for vast and unaffordable social welfare programs that expand like compound interest.

In any case, because of the tiny number of people born via donated sperm, this book would be short, like the book listing black business leaders.

However, since sperm donation -- in the legitimate sense -- is a white activity, will the racial imbalance in the sperm donation world become a civil rights issue in which blacks see themselves as victims who deserve compensation?

"...If you're afraid of black nationalism, you're afraid of revolution. And if you love revolution, you love black nationalism.

Has even ONE black revolution led to the betterment of life for blacks?

Yeah. One. The Civil War. But when blacks go to war against the governments under which they live, life in the new regimes gets worse because it becomes obvious that vast opportunities are withheld. Or the new regimes are so corrupt and incompetent that even the simplest social programs are useless.

I am of another opinion. "Diary of a Negress" is written by a disingenuous phoney blaKKK racist who lives for the psychological one-upsmanship only the forever viktim can contrive ... who sucks the nectar of blaKKK female viktimhood like it is her only nourishment, and this gives her power. She fears any truth other than hers. She comforts herself with White Hatespeech and feels self-righteous and smug in her skin and stereotypes. She smells like a melanin-enhanced Neo-Nazi. Her spirit is kin to theirs.

White slave masters have surely done a mind-job on us, haven't they? Nothing is more potent in the destruction of a people than self-hate. And we, as blacks, have more self-haters than any race I know! Consider this: The House Negro became what he became, a pussy, because he was afraid of dying. Living on his knees was more important than dying on his feet. The Field Negro( I am a Field Negress myself)isn't afraid to die for his cause. He knew better...He was smarter than his oppressor and knew of "The Plan" at work. You'll see plenty of House Negroes out there, Michael Steele, Amy Holmes( who desperately wants Jewish money)Herman Cain and too many more to list. But we are the ones that make the white racist quiver with fear. Keep up the good work!

As for you, Anonymous: White supremacy will be the death of me and perhaps you too. Once you've sucked up all the resources in the world, you'll have no choice but to turn on your own kind. Which you've already begun to do. I'm speaking the truth about your kind. Something white people can't handle. Denial is your Mother's Milk. I don't write for whites. If I did, I'd have to tone down the context, language and truthfulness. I write to educate my people but more so to free myself of this disease called Supremacy.Asshole.

Dr.Reine c/o 2017 said... "Funny isn't it? Poor, single Mom's are told they have to go out to work, otherwise they are 'leaching on society'. Yet rich women (aka Mrs. Romney) who have raised kids with the help of a nanny, an au pair and a other domestic help, are doing "the hardest job in the world"."

I definitely get your point PC, single working Mom's especially those who lack college degrees, work harder than ANY mothers I've ever seen. And (racists white) people forget that women become single parens two oher ways, through divorce and the death of a spouse.

"As for you, Anonymous: White supremacy will be the death of me and perhaps you too. Once you've sucked up all the resources in the world, you'll have no choice but to turn on your own kind. Which you've already begun to do. I'm speaking the truth about your kind. Something white people can't handle. Denial is your Mother's Milk. I don't write for whites. If I did, I'd have to tone down the context, language and truthfulness. I write to educate my people but more so to free myself of this disease called Supremacy.Asshole."

You are a supremist asshole? Sounds like it. White hate, Jewish Supremacy? Whites suck up all the resources? Only Whites? Do you not use resources and demand resources? Do you live, breath, eat, drive, live in this country? Work, create, use? If you are not part of this counrty/community and dont share in it's problems and blame everyone else than why are you sucking up any of our resources?

Clearly you are racist. How is it that you are not part of this country and have no responsibility for anything and it is whites fault and responsibility? Are you a White persons child that they owe you and you can make demands and take what you want but they cannot do the same? What century do you live in that you are not able to fully utilize the law that favors anyone non white and feel so oppressed?

You say you speak the truth and others can't handle it, somehow this sounds like an extreme projection.

Conclusion you need help. You are a hateful person who is clearly delusional and affiliates everything you dont like about yourself as being the fault of the white race. You are ugly not because of a racist white and if they werent racist they would find you attractive. You are just ugly inside and out.

Seek help and learn to come to grips about your unhappiness being born black and wish that you were born a blonde hair blue eyed white girl. Remember a lot of guys love dark latino women, you are just ugly. Whites didn't make you who you are, you did.

I find it utterly amusing that you frequent black blogs. Why you wonder? Because on Stormfront you'd be just another invisible, powerless white man. On Field's blog, you stand out. You HAVE a voice here and you can get noticed. You reek of Fear. Stay tuned to my second post " The Fear" which explains to a tee why you're desperate to hold on to your "whiteness". You sense somethings a-comin'. You don't know what...but it's there.

You love this blog, don't you? It's the only way to have a pissing match with an educated, black man, your eternal foe. In person, you'd cower...here, hidden behind the comfort of a computer screen, you're fearless. Please continue to read my blog. Perhaps one day, you too will be freed of your poison.

Field:Don't you find it funny that you are called a "race-baiter" for simply speaking the truth? I am constantly amazed at the level of white mental pathology. I'm doing a post tonight on a contraversial subject that plagues the black culture...then I'll do a post on white pathology.

I believe that if you were a white man, like Tim Wise, you'd get more avid "listeners" of the pale kind. After all, whites only seem to believe what other whites tell them.Peace...I must do some Q&A for work so...talk later.

Field this is one of my favorite speeches in the league with "The Ballot or the Bullet". It aptly describes this modern day phenomena. It's amazing how much we change and stay the same! "Many things are true at once".

I've also provided on my site your link and that of Melissa Harris-Perry on his birthday celebration. Thanks for what you do for there are many of us out here who appreciate it!

P.S. I really like that site you featured on the sidebar..'The Conversation.'

Leave Lloyd alone Field, only he can stand in a sea of white people in Texas and insult the only other brother there at a Tea Party Rally. I'm positive Llody was right that the brotha was the only racist in the crowd. It would be funny if it wasn't so sad.

I find it utterly amusing that you frequent black blogs. Why you wonder? Because on Stormfront you'd be just another invisible, powerless white man. On Field's blog, you stand out. You HAVE a voice here and you can get noticed. You reek of Fear.

Stay tuned to my second post " The Fear" which explains to a tee why you're desperate to hold on to your "whiteness".

Desperate/Fear? You really do need help. Hold on to whiteness? As opposed to what embracing everything you like, you are, you think, you want? Why are you holding on to your blackness?

You sense somethings a-comin'. You don't know what...but it's there.

No, unlike you I don't sense. I prepare. You are nuts. Add in the mystical with the magical with insanity and that is your hodgepodge of thought, simply justifying your racism.

You love this blog, don't you? It's the only way to have a pissing match with an educated, black man, your eternal foe. In person, you'd cower...here, hidden behind the comfort of a computer screen, you're fearless.

What makes you think so? Because you are strong, brilliant and no one can debate you in person? Or are speaking truth again saying if this were in person you would what? What exactly would you do? You need to meet more white people, they aren't all weak willed and weak kneed and certaintly not afraid of someone like you.

Please continue to read my blog. Perhaps one day, you too will be freed of your poison.

Seems like the one filled with poison and hate that despises truth is you.

Stay tuned to my second post " The Fear" which explains to a tee why you're desperate to hold on to your "whiteness".

It's not "whiteness" that whites want to retain. It's an understanding of the painfully obvious fact that black nations are economic and social nightmares. It's knowing that a black-run America would become as much of a mess as other black-run nations.

True, it would take a while. There'd be the South Africa stage, when the siphoning of white affluence begins.

But it's not likely a black-run America would become the new Haiti anytime soon. However, it would enter the floundering stage as multi-national companies relocated their principal offices to more hospitable nations. Perhaps Canada.

There's no black nation on the planet that attracts white immigrants -- except for the few places where wealthy whites can live in closed communities away from the crime and brutality.

Do American-bron blacks pack up and depart for black nations? Almost never. Moreover, every black nation has a negative immigration rate -- you know what that means -- more people are leaving than coming.

Whites reasonably fear black organizational and political incompetence. But in your own delusional way, you turn white worries about black failure into a fault of whites.

Here's a current story about those Field Negros Little Malcolm was talking about:

The shooting death of Courtney D. Taylor, 31, in a parking lot in Rainier Beach on Wednesday was the most recent in a spate of violent incidents in the area.

Around noon on Thursday, a group of people gathered in the parking lot of the Jack in the Box on Rainier Avenue South to join hands and say a prayer for Courtney D. Taylor, who was fatally shot there the night before.

Taylor, 31, was a father of five and a certified electrician, his friends say. They concede he wasn’t an angel and had a criminal history, according to court documents, but he was “a good father and a good man. He didn’t deserve this,” said Kellie Coleman, who said she was his girlfriend.

“We don’t want to see another young person lose their life so aimlessly and so needlessly,” said Pastor Joe Phillips of the Holly Park Community Church.

The shooting, which was the most recent in a spate of violent incidents in the area, called attention to the Rainier Beach neighborhood and underscored how a single incident can be seen differently by those in its orbit.

While most lamented the death, others who work and live in the area said violence is not an unexpected result when the bored and young—and armed—congregate. Meanwhile, much of the media attention was focused not on the shooting, but on the immediate aftermath that police described as hostility and aggression toward responding officers.

Seattle Police Department spokesman Mark Jamieson said an officer who was flagged down immediately after the 8:24 p.m. shooting was met by a hostile crowd of up to 50. Some of the men in a crowd prevented the officer from reaching Taylor, he said, and were “posturing, ripping off their shirts and challenging officers to fight.”

More officers had to be called in, he said, to stabilize the crowd before medics could attend to Taylor.

Precious moments were lost, said police.

If you read through this you get the picture: formerly white area of Seattle taken over by blacks, who then do what they do everywhere. Gangs, home invasions, loitering around and shooting each other. They don’t cooperate with police when they are called to the scene of the crime; instead they threaten them. Over and over and over. The state of Washington remains one of the most liberal in the lower 48.

"While most lamented the death, others who work and live in the area said violence is not an unexpected result when the bored and young—and armed—congregate."

How about that? According to blacks, all it takes for black males to shoot each other is that they hang out together. It’s not that black males plus some factor X equals homicidal violence. It’s that black males plus zero equals homicidal violence.

This is a population so violent that no institutions of society can safely interact with them, without a massive police presence.

Segregation no doubt caused much inconvenience and frustration for black Americans. But it also had its advantages—for blacks as well as for whites. Because in those “old days,” when it was still “like it used to be,” a 31-year-old black man who was a certified electrician and father of five would have spent his days plying his trade; and his off-hours tending to his children and his one wife (not several babymammas). His Sunday mornings he would have spent in church.

… All of which would have left him very little time to waste hanging out in the Jack in the Box parking lot getting into feuds with the local lowlifes—feuds that are settled not with fists but with gunfire. That man might not have enjoyed full “civil rights” or “The Great Society” or “Post-Racial America,” but his life would have had structure and dignity; he would have lived to see his 32nd birthday; and his five children would not grow up fatherless.

Thats why I call you my Brother!One of my favorites. Sadly, it still applies to today.

The critics confuse me - I'm wrong and a hate monger if I want more for myself and family, I'm wrong to want to patronize a business where the owner looks like me, I'm wrong if I am willing to do whatever it takes to make sure that everyone who looks like me, gets a fair shot on an even playing field. Its not hate its love! and once I learn how to love me, I have no problem loving you.

Molly said..."So is the point of posting Malcolm X's speech to reiterate that blacks and whites can't associate? That blacks and white can never even be friends?"

I have found that it is highly problematic to be friends with a typical black person. By typical I mean in the sense of being highly liberal and believing all the anti-white things that go along with it. I found this to be even more true as I got older and began to take life a lot more seriously than in my youth. When I was in junior high school I was friends with a black kid. We had classes together and would hang out at lunch time as we both had an affinity for martial arts films and science fiction. He was also noticeably more intelligent than the other blacks, which made him something of an outcast himself. After graduation we were zoned for the same high school. Our junior high was about 70 percent white with the rest black and Hispanic bussed in from the ghetto. Our new high school was in the ghetto and predominantly black and Hispanic. I will never forget the first day of school. Most of us white kids were walking together in packs in a sort of daze, coming to terms with the fact we had to survive the next three years in this place. It was a jungle. Then I saw my black friend from junior high walking with a couple of black kids. Not only was I happy to see him as a friend, but I figured it would be good for me to show that I was friends with some blacks merely for my own well being. I waved to him and said hello, he barely looked at me and grunted “Yeah, what’s up,” and kept on walking.

I have to say, I was really hurt by that. All of a sudden I was the white devil who could not be associated with, much less acknowledged. The only other time I had been made to feel in a way similar to that was when I was confronted by blatant anti-Semitism as a child by an adult. But I digress. Fast forward to a couple of years ago. My black friend from junior high contacted me through Facebook. We got re-aquatinted to a degree and I never mentioned his slight. He is still very liberal and sees racism around every corner. The things he and his black friends say about Zimmerman would curl your hair. There is no logic. Facts don’t mean a thing. Zimmerman is guilty, guilty, guilty, and racist white America will let him off though he deserves the death penalty. I have commented in as diplomatic a way as possible about his views on the Martin case and other things involving white racism and was politely acknowledged and then found myself persona non grata once again. So in the end, it is possible to be friends with blacks to a degree, but only if you dance to the liberal tune or keep your mouth shut. I for one will no longer live a lie or muzzle myself. If that means I will no longer have any black friends, then so be it.

The real irony here is that behind closed doors blacks will admit things about their own race that they would never utter in front of whites.

Interestingly enough, my husband and I have found that it is easier to have an honest and friendly relationship with lower class blacks than those in the middle and upper classes. They are surprisingly forthright about a lot of things. My husband works with a 40-something-year-old black ex-con at a family bar. They are bouncers there. He would be the first to tell a white girl not to go to a certain nite club because it is “too dark.” He jokes with my husband that black men have it easy—no one gives them a hard time about fathering all those kids and relying on white guys like my husband to support them through welfare. He is not picky about his taste in women, but he is honest about his preference for white women. He is a stereotypical ghetto male—felony convictions, raised in the urban slums, smokes marijuana, has dreadlocks, wears doo-rags, engages in sexual activity in dark corners in public, etc. One odd thing that he does, though, is dip. He often has a large wad of it beneath his lip. I laughed when I found out, commenting that it was not typical of blacks. He admitted to smoking Marlboro cigarettes too. (Most blacks prefer Newports.) And he often refers to himself as a “silverback.”

My point to all this, though, is that I would prefer his refreshingly honest and generally cheerful company, despite his vulgarity, to the obnoxious and self-righteous snobbery and blatant anti-white racism common among middle and upper class blacks. He knows the “game” (the black tax whites pay, for example) and he openly acknowledges it without trying to justify it. With men like him, what you see is what you get. There are no pretenses.

It is the middle and upper class blacks, the Obamas, Al Sharptons and their followers, who serve to instigate the lower class blacks, similar to the Sixties university students whose protests and nihilistic philosophies encouraged those of the lower classes to engage further in criminality and promiscuity. When the ignorant and the poor have leaders like Obama, Sharpton, Jackson, Wright, and Farrakhan, is it any wonder they do what they do? These are false prophets leading black Americans straight over a cliff, taking many white victims with them.

I agree with NS that lower-class blacks are more likely to speak the truth about race than are the elite. Years ago, through my job, I spent a lot of time with a black professional football player who had a contract with us. (I’m keeping this vague for the sake of my anonymity.)

He had grown up in a ghetto and had been involved in petty crime, lots of fights, and several run-ins with the police, though I don’t believe he was ever incarcerated. He was a very charming and gregarious person. Unlike sheltered, privileged blacks like Obama and Eric Holder who have had to cultivate a black identity, complete with the requisite resentments, the football player was for real and unafraid to say exactly what he thought.

Among other things, he told me that after he signed his first NFL contract, he went home for Christmas gave everyone in his nine-member family $10,000, the largest tax-free gift allowable at that time. Shaking his head in disbelief, he told me, “Do you know that before the week was over every single one of them asked me for more money?”

He recalled one of his cousins asking him to comp him tickets for a bowl game. “That’s all I need,” he said he told his cousin, “me down on the field playing football while you’re up in the stands robbing people.”

To a female cousin who made repeated requests for money, he replied, “Maybe you wouldn’t need so much money if you didn’t keep squirting out babies.”

I wouldn’t call this man my friend, exactly, as we didn’t have much in common, but he was an honest guy and I felt comfortable with him.

I have to agree with some of the commenters. The commenter who was surprised at the educated black man’s resentment of whites doesn’t realize that this man was educated to think the way he does. He is typical of blacks who are groomed by white liberals, but don’t know it. This phenomenon has been going on ever since W.E.B. Dubois who, until Barack Obama, was the black man who was the most influenced by white liberal thinkers ever. He also interacted with very few blacks growing up, particularly poor blacks. Contrast his ideas with that of Booker T. Washington who was an actual product of slavery and the black community, and you will see how early this trend started.

I am a (mostly) black woman who has white relatives and grew up in a predominately white Midwestern town. I went east to a very liberal college. Nothing prepared me for white liberal students’ need to verify that I was a victim of racism at every turn, and that I felt blacks were being kept out. There were very few blacks at this school, most of them slightly conservative, and we all agreed on one thing: the reason there were so few blacks there was that a school practically in the wilderness with no business program could not attract a lot of blacks. The lack of blacks was not due to racism. No white liberal would believe me on this point. I was constantly asked what it was like to be a black at this school and whether I felt uncomfortable around so many whites. I quickly learned to avoid white people obsessed with the black experience. They were only interested in being entertained by me (they would compare the black students to each other and favor those who were the most ‘hood) or in finding in me an object for their paternalism. Many blacks did not see through this.

Here’s another example of white liberals’ attitudes toward blacks. I have an African friend married to a white man. We are often at events mixed with white Americans, Africans and a few American blacks. One man who is the typical successful angry black man came regularly to some of these events. He would wait until most, but not all, of the whites had left, and then start yelling about racism and how he would kill a white man, and other violent things. I decided to tell this guy he was out of line and he had no right to talk that way. I asked him for the specific experiences he had that made him feel as if all whites were out to get him, and that he could treat all whites as if they are guilty racists. He could give me none. He merely called me a sell-out and other nasty things.

Afterwards, my African friend’s white husband told me that I needed to be more understanding and that I just didn’t understand what this guy had gone through. I asked him to be specific about what he meant by “what this guy had gone through.” He did not give me a clear answer. He made it clear he believed this guy had every right to say what he did and that I was out of line! He—the white man—thinks by taking this position he will get respect from the black man. He doesn’t understand that this guy will only tolerate his presence, but never respect him.

I have to agree with some of the commenters. The commenter who was surprised at the educated black man’s resentment of whites doesn’t realize that this man was educated to think the way he does. He is typical of blacks who are groomed by white liberals, but don’t know it. This phenomenon has been going on ever since W.E.B. Dubois who, until Barack Obama, was the black man who was the most influenced by white liberal thinkers ever. He also interacted with very few blacks growing up, particularly poor blacks. Contrast his ideas with that of Booker T. Washington who was an actual product of slavery and the black community, and you will see how early this trend started.

I am a (mostly) black woman who has white relatives and grew up in a predominately white Midwestern town. I went east to a very liberal college. Nothing prepared me for white liberal students’ need to verify that I was a victim of racism at every turn, and that I felt blacks were being kept out. There were very few blacks at this school, most of them slightly conservative, and we all agreed on one thing: the reason there were so few blacks there was that a school practically in the wilderness with no business program could not attract a lot of blacks. The lack of blacks was not due to racism. No white liberal would believe me on this point. I was constantly asked what it was like to be a black at this school and whether I felt uncomfortable around so many whites. I quickly learned to avoid white people obsessed with the black experience. They were only interested in being entertained by me (they would compare the black students to each other and favor those who were the most ‘hood) or in finding in me an object for their paternalism. Many blacks did not see through this.

Here’s another example of white liberals’ attitudes toward blacks. I have an African friend married to a white man. We are often at events mixed with white Americans, Africans and a few American blacks. One man who is the typical successful angry black man came regularly to some of these events. He would wait until most, but not all, of the whites had left, and then start yelling about racism and how he would kill a white man, and other violent things. I decided to tell this guy he was out of line and he had no right to talk that way. I asked him for the specific experiences he had that made him feel as if all whites were out to get him, and that he could treat all whites as if they are guilty racists. He could give me none. He merely called me a sell-out and other nasty things.

Afterwards, my African friend’s white husband told me that I needed to be more understanding and that I just didn’t understand what this guy had gone through. I asked him to be specific about what he meant by “what this guy had gone through.” He did not give me a clear answer. He made it clear he believed this guy had every right to say what he did and that I was out of line! He—the white man—thinks by taking this position he will get respect from the black man. He doesn’t understand that this guy will only tolerate his presence, but never respect him.

Last week we heard the story of the white jogger being gunned down in Kansas City.

Today the Kansas City Star reports that Governor Sam Brownback of Kansas is going to sign an apology for segregation.

I think the timing of these completely unrelated stories exemplify the current Zeitgeist of America and West, forever apologizing for the crimes of the past while ignoring the crimes of the present.

The irony is that blacks’ current non-stop racial violence against whites shows why the segregation existed in the first place, and what happened as a result of the segregation being ended. Instead of apologizing for segregation, whites should be calling for its partial return.

"I think the timing of these completely unrelated stories exemplify the current Zeitgeist of America and West, forever apologizing for the crimes of the past while ignoring the crimes of the present."

What do you propose, continue to ignore the evils of the past? Yeah, that is really the right thing to do--forget about lynching, segregation, slavery, Jim Crow, and other injustices by a collective group of people against another. Let's just look at an individual instance against a white today. That's more important.

field negro said... Is it just me, or did both of those ( I knew a black guy once) stories seem like they came from the same place?

It's just you Field Sharpie Sharpton, you are too suspicious that stories that sound like very realistic everday occurances are plots. They sound very realistic to me, I can tell you a half dozen just like this and it's eery how they are almost the same.

When you bring baggage to relationships, friendships and such, it gets to be not worth it. I could care less about someone skin color, yet to many it seems to be the ONLY thing they care about.

LOL. Black people smoke too much weed. Paranoid reverse racist black people. You hate yourselves more than anybody hates you. You blame the world for your blatant mistakes and take no responsibility for your families welfare or the welfare of society. This black rhetoric is starting to remind me of this drunk red head I used to know. She would screw any guy who showed and interest and then couldn't figure out why people thought she was a slut. The truth is nobody is thinking about you! People have lives, jobs, families, and interests that don't include self hating, paranoid/delusional black people because these people are very manic, imbalanced and unpleasant to deal with. I think it has more to do mental instability than race. There are multitudes of black people around the world who have suffered just as many injustices and yet who make the concious choice not to let baggage rule thier lives. It's like that red head saying I'm this way because someone one hundred or two hundred years ago called my great great grandmother a slut. Get real.

Take some responsibility for yourself and your place in life. Get some goals and an action plan and work towards that goal. You will be amazed how little you will think about your racial hangups when you actually have a life!

Monkey business leads to thisMonkeys make a monkey's messThe dormant ape in them awakesAnd there a monkey's stance does takeThumping chest and showing teethBelieving violence makes them freeIn the streets and rising upThe angry monkeys try their luckWhile in their troops they quickly gatherAnd sensing fear do quickly scatterInto the crowds of brooding poorNow calling out in primate roarThe younger apes against the oldSensing fear becoming boldWith their use of rock and fireTaking all which they desireSensing they can win the hourWith these tools of monkey powerForgetting as their jungle burnsThe morning light will soon returnWhen monkey shame will quickly comeAs they see what they have doneWhen in the naked light of dayThe world beholds their monkey play

*COMMENTS, LINKS, AND CUT AND PASTE ARTICLES, ARE NOT ALL ENDORSED BY THE PUBLISHER.

Follow the The Field Negro via e-mail.

TWEET ME

@fieldnegro

DISCLAIMER

***The views expressed on this site are the field's and the field's alone. They do not reflect the views of his employer, or any professional or legal organization with which he is affiliated.***

This is a commercial free blog.

Money is nice, but being able to speak my mind is better.

"Real talk: Daniel Rubin has a great little piece up wherein he chats with The Field Negro, the Philly-based blogger who sharply ponders all things black on a daily basis. (Seriously, if you’ve never checked in with TFN, you should: Its author, Wayne Bennett, is a fantastic read who can cut through bullshit like a hot knife through butter, which is a far grosser analogy than I wanted to make, but there you have it.)" ~Philebrity~

"..While most of what he writes is tongue-in-cheek, his space is a safe house for candid discussions about race, especially in the comments section, where people of all colors meet."~~Daniel Rubin, "The Philadelphia Inquirer"~~

"To white people, Bennett's musings are like kitchen-table talk from a kitchen they may otherwise never set foot in. To African Americans, he is part of a growing army of black Internet amateurs who have taken up the work once reserved for ministers and professional activists: the work of setting a black agenda, shaping black opinion and calling attention to the state of the nation's racial affairs."

~~Richard Fausset, "L.A. Times"~~~

"That's why I love the blog "Field Negro" so much. Field, as he's known to his fans, has the sense of reality that it takes to call out the (CowPuckey) of blame beating by those who are in positions of power and their lackeys. Because of his handle and his unabashed way of writing about racial issues, Field is often cited as a "Black blogger." What he is, however, is a first-class detector of blame deflection and an excellent student of history. If you want to write about the past and future of repression there's really no other perspective to take - which is why everyone should read Field."

"Half a century after Little Rock, the Montgomery bus boycott and the tumultuous dawn of the modern civil rights era, the new face of the movement is Facebook, MySpace and some 150 black blogs united in an Internet alliance they call theAfroSpear.

Older, familiar leaders such as Rev. Jesse Jackson, Rev. Al Sharpton and NAACP Chairman Julian Bond, are under challenge by a younger generation of bloggers known by such provocative screen names as Field Negro, thefreeslaveand African American Political Pundit. And many of the newest struggles are being waged online."~Howard Witt-The Chicago Tribune~

"I had no idea, for example, of the extent of the African-American blogging world out there and its collective powers of dissemination.But now, after reading thousands of anguished, thoughtful comments posted on these blogs reflecting on issues of persistent racial discrimination in the nation's schools and courtrooms, what's clear to me is that there's a new, "virtual" civil rights movement out there on the Internet that can reach more people in a few hours than all the protest marches, sit-ins and boycotts of the 1950s and 60s put together." ~Chicago Tribune Reporter, Howard Witt~